Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
So, what books on hermeneutics have you studied to arrive at the interpretive conclusions that you currently have?
Which books does God require in order for people to understand what he has written?
But I'm sure a good grammar book wouldn't be something He'd sneeze at either.
If you want, I can write out a list of books and--since you seem to be such an authority on how to interpret the Bible--you can tell me which ones are utterly useless. How about that?
I would be very surprised if God cared about grammar. Did you know that all original manuscripts were written in all caps, without punctuations and without separation between words?
Are you a Catholic? I find it hilarious that Protestants are running to their substitute for a Pope, in whatever form they can find it. I may not be a grammar genius, but I'm aware that Christians are all over the map when it comes to their Bible interpretation. Catholics (and Orthodox) tend to be a bit more consistent.
Well, it's one thing if I dropped out of the Sky above and then offered you some tidbits of truth, and it's quite another if I, as a fellow human being, one with a sinful nature such as your own, will readily-----very readily-----admit that just about anything I 'know' I learned by slicing and dicing the various points of view that exist on various subject matter, both theological and philosophical, as well as sociological and scientific. And this means that, similar to Newton, very little of what I have to say is of my own devising. Heck, I've even taken a few pointers from Hugh Hefner along the way (although, something about that statement doesn't sound right).And why do I need the books you've studied if we have you here?
Little to none of what I've ultimately come to conclude about best practices in interpreting the bible have come by my own power.
And you interpreted my written words to 'mean' that I allow others to interpret for me? No, there's a whole continuum in the cognitive process that goes into any one person's attempt to interpret any other human communication. Maybe study some Communication Theory, BigV. It's time for you to get better educated, because you show signs of 'need' in this area.Well, congratulations on having other people do the interpreting for you. Good job. Do you have others read the Bible for you also?
I disagree. What we have, in reality, is a disparate collection of letters and short books from the 1st and 2nd centuries (and before) that, in and of themselves, are theologically non-comprehensive. So at best, we're all trying to do our 'best' to decipher the meaning and any possible implications these writings could have, most of which aren't complete or clear, which is why so many of us have different understandings of what we think the Biblical writers are intending to tell us. Of course, this isn't too much different from the human handling of any other disparate information that we all may try to engage. It's called "life as we try to know it."Ultimately, what we find, is that Christians themselves have no clue what the Bible is supposed to mean. Jesus was not a fan of taking the Bible literally in the New Testament but was a stickler in the Old Testament times. Who knows what his feelings on the matter are? People that have a 'personal relationship' with him are all over the map on what the Bible means.
Maybe study some Communication Theory, BigV. It's time for you to get better educated, because you show signs of 'need' in this area.
So, you think Jesus was a "stickler" on taking the O.T. 'literally'?
Jesus was not a fan of taking the Bible literally in the New Testament but was a stickler in the Old Testament times
Well, congratulations on having other people do the interpreting for you. Good job. Do you have others read the Bible for you also?
Ultimately, what we find, is that Christians themselves have no clue what the Bible is supposed to mean. Jesus was not a fan of taking the Bible literally in the New Testament but was a stickler in the Old Testament times. Who knows what his feelings on the matter are? People that have a 'personal relationship' with him are all over the map on what the Bible means.
Is this what I said?
No, what you said was, "Jesus was not a fan of taking the Bible literally in the New Testament but was a stickler in the Old Testament times." I'm not sure how to interpret this. Could you help me out here?
According to the mainstream Christian position, Jesus was the God of the Old Testament and continues to be the God of the New Testament. Therefore, Jesus agrees with the Old Testament God, when he told people not to do any work on a Saturday and even had the poor stick gathering chap in Numbers 15 killed for breaking this serious rule.
However, when Jesus arrives, in bodily form, he is transformed. He who is without sin is to cast the first stone. That wasn't his rule previously, but now, voila, it's the rule and the right thing to do. So, that's what I meant in my previous post. Sorry, it wasn't clear the first time.
Where does Jesus say something about being without sin and casting the first stone?
I don't get the question. I mean, I don't believe you don't know how to find the answer.
I don't know about all of that. If the whole section involving Jesus' comment about "no one casting the first stone" is known to not have been an original part of the earliest manuscripts of the Gospels, then even though I can say that I very much like the story, I'd have to think twice about assuming that it tells us anything exacting about Jesus and His words. Of course, you knew this already, right?
Jesus was not a fan of taking the Bible literally in the New Testament but was a stickler in the Old Testament times. Who knows what his feelings on the matter are?
Good point. John 7:53-8:11 is likely not part of the original. However, I think the passage demonstrates Jesus' attitude on the matters of the Law (of Moses).
How many sinners did Jesus punish by killing them as the Old Testament required? Considering that the answer is ZERO, as far as the Gospels tell us, considering the undisputed texts, then my overall point stands:
Why can't the god just drop around and explain it, in the same way that Abraham shared a non kosher meal with a god and had a face to face discussion about the number of righteous children in Gomorrah before the god walked down to count them for itself, since it wasn't an omniscient or omnipresent type of god (Gen 18).... probably MORE THAN you've been reading. But I'm sure a good grammar book wouldn't be something He'd sneeze at either.I mean, I'm sure God doesn't put a price on sheer ignorance, as if it's 'ok' to be a complete moron or an ignoramus, especially if a person actually has the I.Q. and aptitude to learn to think, interpret and communicate better than he already does.
If you want, I can write out a list of books and--since you seem to be such an authority on how to interpret the Bible--you can tell me which ones are utterly useless. How about that?
Dunno about that. Many atheists (my self included) have read the Bible cover to cover- (yes, even the lineages) and remain unconvinced.Most won't take the time to do the research but will hold to whatever their personal opinion is.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?